needs pakistan for its withdrawal from afghanistan. pakistan has to help the u.s. strike eye deal with the taliban, karachi port is the main port of exit for u.s. vehicles and containers and et cetera. pakistan needs a relationship with the u.s. the last five months, we've had no relationship, and all the indicators have swung down-- aid flows have stopped. development aid has stopped. nobody will talk to us because nobody-- everybody wants us to have a relationship with the united states. so i hope now it will get back on track. >> jon: you said something very interesting-- we desperately need pakistan not just for the strategic implications because the leadership of the taliban live in pakistan. and that's the thing for americans i think we go, "wait, say that again? what?" after reading the book it became clear. there are two talibans-- an afghan taliban and a pakistani taliban. the pakistanis are cooperating with the afghan taliban but not their own taliban. is that correct? >> the pakistani-- after 9/11, after the we're ended, most of the taliban who survived

>> pakistan? >> rose: yes. >> of course. >> rose: if informs in fact the united states said we're going to reduce... they'll ask you this. the united states is going to dramatically reduce its aid both military and economic aid to pakistan. would the pakistanis then do all these things we would like for them to do having to do with conflict in afghanistan or not? >> no, because in my view their ultimate goal is to control... pakistan's ultimate goal is to control afghanistan. >> rose: or have somebody they think is favorable to them. >> the only ones they're comfortable with is the taliban government. it's not just having the indians surround them. they'll say "we lost dhaka, we want kabul." and they also want to establish a... recreate a mogul empire. they want trade routes to sunni central asia and they also-- something people don't talk about-- water to pakistan comes from outside pakistan. it comes from afghanistan, it comes from india. they need in the future to have some access to water. all

of pakistan. they have been housed and based in pakistan and they have been very fed up with the kind of manipulation of pakistan. so they had a lot of reasons to see if the americans were interested in an end to the war, in a deal, which could result, first of all in a decent recall, so you're not fighting on the way out. and secondly, something that could eventually bring about a cease fire, and which could then lead to political negotiations with president karzai, for a power sharing agreement. so that war does not break out again when the americans leave. >> perhaps the american strategy, not just for negotiations with the taliban and afghanistan, but regional strategy overall, in terms of ending the war, in terms of strategic announcement, has it changed a lot since richard holbrooke died? >> well, it's become even more fraught. and i mean, pakistan has not talked to the united states for five months. only the other day, president obama met the prime minister. as you said, the road has been s

>> pakistan has repeatedly said that bin laden, osama bin laden was an enemy for pakistan. pakistani military has hunted down more al qaeda operatives than anywhere else in the world. al qaeda is an enemy for pakistan. as i mentioned, a joint approach, a join operation, would have obviously been much more useful to carry on the partnership and to carry on efforts to be able to achieve what i am calling common objectives and i think that is what is important. to look at this as a common objective, look at us moving towards a common goal because at the strategic plan united states and pakistan agree on what are their goals and objectives. where we have differences, which have become apparent in the fast few months as to what are the tools that should be used to be able to achieve those end objectives. and it is no working without ownership of the people of any country, of any place. you can see that in the united states also when you go to war in a country you have to have ownership of the people of your country to -- because war is costly, as it has been for pakistan. we've

relations with pakistan. well i mean it's been up and down i think you have to you have to you have to note that. the pakistanis of pakistani public reaction when one of the leaders of the pakistani taliban was it was actually positive i mean largest been negative by and large the public in pakistan has viewed this as evidence of weakness of the country the fact that its own sovereignty is weak when the american government can run this program it can be can target and strike pakistani citizens without their government being able to control it and right now we're seeing the lead into a new parliamentary election then pakistan and anti-u.s. and anti grown rhetoric is at a peak and i'd say the new emerging potential political stars on the pakistani stage are united in their anti-american rhetoric anti grown rhetoric and this is definitely having an impact on the way the government and the military interact with the united states it's much more who much more distance vision that that we have the you know the gros

but so is pakistan. when you look at proliferation, we saw what happened with the network, one individual in pakistan with the help of a lot of others, basically had a nuclear arms bazaar all over the world, enabling countries like north korea and others, libya to gain a great number of components of nuclear weapons. so it's a great concern, one of the toughest problems we face. but when you think about it, the world has a stake here. you have an interesting question about sovereignty. all of us believe in national sovereignty and so forth. there was a recent article in i don't know whether it's completely valid, but it was in american scientific magazine. and it postulated with the help of super computers a hypothetical of 100 bombs going off between india and pack stan and it basically said, based on the computer models, a couple hundred million people killed quickly and the consequences of the global cooling that would take place over the next five or six years, there would be 1 billion to 2 billion p

most of the taliban is in pakistan. pakistan can do a great deal to help the peace process. >> in france, mohammed merah is suspected of being behind the killings has come out that he was in afghanistan. >> unfortunately, you have the pakistani taliban who are fighting the pakistan army right now. they are becoming kind of a proxy for al qaeda. al qaeda has been decimated, but a lot of their ideas have been taken up by some elements of the pakistani taliban, who are still training a lot of europeans. there was a recent case of several germans who were trained, went back to germany, and the british muslims have been trying to go in there. the pakistan army is dealing with this issue, but it is extremely difficult. the terrain, the breakdown of relations with america, the lack of cooperation with america on the border of palestine. i hope these things can be resumed and the army will take on these things. there is a major threat to pakistan if there is a terrorist threat in europe that can be traced back to pakistan. >> i

taliban are in pakistan, the leadership mostly in pakistan. the pakistanis expected they would be the main deliverer of talks would be the american because they had the taliban on their soil and what happens instead is that the americans bypass the pakistanis so there is an issue and they briefed the pakistanis for quite some time. now i think the american realize the fact that pakistan needs to be brought on board if and when relations between the two countries are reviewed because for four months we've had a complete breakdown i relations. american officials have not talked to pakistani officials at all. >> suarez: in recent months, the united states passed its tenth anniversary in afghanistan. can the u.s. achieve its objective there is if it has a pakistan that doesn't see the future of the country in the same way? >> the well i think three essential things are needed which president obama stressed at the beginning of the administration but they have been overwhelmed. the first thing really is a regional consensus amongst the neighbors and

pakistan was on very good terms with china, partly because china was an enemy of india's which pakistan was also very hostile to. and pakistan was one of the few countries that actually had direct flights into china. and pakistan had the further advantage at least for this of being a dictatorship, and general khan could do what he wanted pretty well, the president of pakistan, so, that's the channel that was established. and so the americans would send a message saying we'd like to talk and the chinese would send one back, possibly, what do you want to talk about, and another message would go back. no direct communications. no pieces of paper went from washington to beijing or beijing to washington, it went through this intermediary in pakistan or sometimes through the ambassador of pakistan in beijing or in washington. and it was a very, very important route and that's really the way the invitation to send henry kissinger came. >> by the way, what kind of -- i assume you looked at the press. what kind of press did richard nixon get overall? watergate hadn't happened. >> no. >> that was

>> i wanted to add something on pakistan. bill and i over the last six months had two lengthy meetings. one with a group of foreign military in india and pakistan. after that one with pakistani and u.s. officials. one of the sessions was devoted to a couple of economists. one from hoover, michael baskin and one from pakistan. the net of that discussion, it was the only really high point. the net of the discussion was the pakistanis are foregoing tremendous economic opportunities by virtue of the tension that pervades the country. if they can do something about it, they could have almost an explosive economic situation. so, our thought is hold that up to people and say, come on, why don't you get real and pay all. whether how much of an impact that made, i have no idea, but it was a dramatic moment, wouldn't you say, bill? >> very dramatic. i would also say the first meeting we had, i met with the foreign defense minister of pakistan. i asked why he was going to so much trouble to come to the meetings and discuss these issues.

with impunity in pakistan. and that quote iran continues to support the insurgentsy and fan the flames of violence. let me ask you about pakistan first. in about the significance to the fight in afghanistan of the continued sanctuaries or save havens for our enemies that exist in pakistan and bottom line can we -- can we win this fight if those sanctuaries continue to be protected in pakistan. >> senator, i think we can. i believe it's going to require some pretty hard decisions with the afghans eventually with respect to how they'll dispose their forces on the ground. the east clearly, the eastern corridor from the northeast ward towards up route seven to kabul that whole area and the security zone around kabul is under threat from the taliban operating out of the safe havens in pakistan. but i believe that with continued operations in the east and ultimately disposing enough of the afghan forces in the east we can build a sufficient defense in depth ultimately to be able to protect both the population in the

most of the taliban is in pakistan. pakistan can do a great deal to help the peace process. >> in france, mohammed merah is suspected of being behind the killings has come out that he was in afghanistan. >> unfortunately, you have the pakistani taliban who are fighting the pakistan army right now. they are becoming kind of a proxy for al qaeda. al qaeda has been decimated, but a lot of their ideas have been taken up by some elements of the pakistani taliban, who are still training a lot of europeans. there was a recent case of several germans who were trained, went back to germany, and the british muslims have been trying to go in there. the pakistan army is dealing with this issue, but it is extremely difficult. the terrain, the breakdown of relations with america, the lack of cooperation with america on the border of palestine. i hope these things can be resumed and the army will take on these things. there is a major threat to pakistan if there is a terrorist threat in europe that can be traced back to pakistan. >> i

historic and and really acute rivalry between india and pakistan i mean some of at least some of the violence we see in afghanistan is is actually the sort of hot war side of the long cold war that has existed between this two rival subcontinental neighbors in addition pakistan hardly any and afghanistan do not get along particularly well with iran and the taliban government almost fight a war with afghan with the iran back in the year two thousand. so this is why high region where i hear you know the responsibilities of afghan why is it the responsibility of united states and nato to create stability there why can't it be up to the neighborhood to do what it might be violent but then again there's a lot of violence anyway i think there actually should be a neighborhood wide sort of helsinki style conference to try and improve. regional to try and reach regional agreements on major issues like transit trade and regional issues like narcotics trafficking and regional issues like nuclear proliferation on issues like trade this is a this is a region that. has tremendous opportunity from

. >> the question on pakistan. according to news reports, and the need report entitled state of the taliban 2012 included claims by taliban detainees that pakistan is providing support to the insurgency and are reportedly also portrayed though a strange and distrustful relationship between the packets in the intelligence, the isi and key insurgent groups including the haqqani network. this is what the report -- the document reportedly stated. there is a widespread assumption that pakistan will never allow the tablet and the chance to become independent of isi control. do you share that same assumption that pakistan will never allow the taliban a chance to become independent of isi control click or? >> i haven't seen this report, syria. i think the pakistanis, via the isi would want to maintain visibility and influence. i'm not so sure i would go safaris to say a consistent dominance but they certainly want to have insight and influence in afghanistan particularly in a post-2014 context i'm remembering their primary

>> pakistan. >> stephen: pakistan? >> yeah. >> stephen: are you ever-- do you ever hope that a war would break out in, like, fiji? ( laughter ) >> yeah. i mean, i have to say, the first war zone i ever went to was sri lankathis, island in the indian ocean. and i haven't been to fiji, but sis ri lanka is extraordinary. i covered this kind of scene of a massacre, and i went back to my hotel, which was right on this beautiful beach in this gorgeous harbor, and i had lobster that night for dinner. so it-- that happens a lot. some of these places are actually pretty gorgeous. yemen is stunning. it's amazing. but it's-- >> stephen: really? >> but it's like the end of the world, too, you know. ( laughter ) >> stephen: you know what, i've been doing coverage of the entire world from inside a studio for years. ( laughter ) and if i can recommend something, i have a green screen over there, you just stand in front of it, we put a picture behind you, and everyone believes that you're in the middle east. and one-- one kind of, lik

. >> now, for something much easier, let's talk about pakistan. [laughter] >> that is a law professor thinking that is easier. go ahead. >> a number of our questioners note that it seems to be public record that there have been some challenges in the relationship between our government and pakistan and, yet, pakistan continues to be an important strategic partner, and allied in a very complicated region. i would love to hear you speak a little bit about how you see that relationship with respect to our law enforcement activities and what you think we might expect in that relationship going forward. >> it is interesting. in today's world of globalization -- when i started as a united states attorney back in the late 1970's, i probably had one case that had some ramifications outside of this district. now, i would say it is probably the reverse. nine out of 10 cases intersect with persons in other jurisdictions, whether it be within the united states or internationally. what happens is, regardless of whether it is pakistan or a number of countries y

>> well, i think pakistan is seeking to do something. >> rose: so we're left for pakistan to do something they have not done before, at times of strained relationships with pakistan to ensure the mission in afghanistan can achieve its objective. >> the pakistanis had been fighting as well. i think it's important to understand in the last two years, they've suffered over 3,000 dead. that's not an inconsequential number of casualties and a couple of tens of thousands wounded. they have an i.e.d. problem similar to the one we have. pakistanis are making an investment in this as well. >> rose: they have a problem with the taliban as well. >> exactly. >> rose: their own taliban. >> we would ask them to do more. that's ultimately a decision that's going to have to come from continued discussion between our government and theirs. but i believe we've-- i've had good conversations with general kaani about cross-border operations and operations on each side of border where we can leverage each other's capability. >> rose: you mentionedly the magic name in terms of pakistan. you're convinced he's do

it will not help either pakistan or they go out and the united states. on the sacrifices that pakistan has made over the last year, they have always had a something like 50,000 civilian deaths as a consequence of 9/11. for the healing of the wound to happen, that -- it needs a diplomatic process for reconciliation and french. in -- a french ship. the >> thank you for joining us. in france, nicolas sarkozy has told tv networks not to broadcast the footage of the violence. the families of the recent victims of terrorism have also called for the courage not to be shown. you might think this is something from the terminator movies, but it is a relative that could lead to industrial revolution. the process of designing and creating new forms of life by making artificial dna, that in turn, produces everything from medicine to fuels. but as you can imagine, it has some crying foul. >> imagine the power to design a new forms of life, to dream up new versions of the genes inside everything on earth and to create new organisms that have never before existed. that

these are things that pakistan needs help settle in. the tension will not help either pakistan or the united states or nato. >> what are you looking for from president obama, what one small starting point? >> one starting point would be to express some sense of the sacrifices that pakistan has made over the last 10 years. there has been something like 50,000 civilian deaths as a consequence of 9/11, in which they were not involved. it could be a balm toward healing of the wound, and possibly once again reconciliation and frontier. >> thank you very much for joining us. in france, president nicholas sarkozy has urged the tv networks not to broadcast violent videos filmed by mohammad merah in to lose. aljazeera decided not to broadcast the images. the families of the victims also called for the bit -- the footage not to be shown. you might think this is something from the terminator movies, but it is real science. and it could lead to a new industrial revolution. the process involves scientists designing and creating new forms of life by

or sorry i should say more power more a narcotic for grown in pakistan's tribal areas an area about the size of rhode island than all of afghanistan a country about the size of texas so i think it was stable china got a cold war game brought cold war games brought superpowers into that region and i think i do agree that the afghan people have been the greatest victims of this and i think the united states really left them in the lurch in the end of the one nine hundred eighty s. and were about to do it again it's a real tragedy so if you want to be pointed out they be a true yeah it may be a tragedy but it's not or you know when we talk strategy strategies military this country doesn't succeed when it uses its military if somebody fights back except for world war two when you go through all of the other wars we don't have the staying power we're not going to get the staying power alternately we're going to leave if not this year the next to the year after and everybody knows that whatever you want to. hear. what about payable. i was just you know there's already one taboo to going t

so the question who knew in pakistan? who facilitated the movements that deckland was talking about, but more to the point, who in the chain of command might have been knowledgeable as he moved from place to place and then in thank you long stretch of six year in abat bad, the pakistani version of west point, who knew he was there? who scheduled the question. >> warner: and you think this it account ftrue, just really strongly suggests it wouldn't have been plausible or possible for him to operate without somebody knowing. >> somebody must known that a tall foreigner was present in these places, and especially in abotabad, i don't mean to point the finger at the senior leadership of the pakistani military. we don't have evidence that suggests that, but somebody knew, and nobody followed up. >> warner: deckland, let me get back to you briefly, her account seems very focused on her visa status, the questions and the answers. is this part of a broader investigation into who knew where bin laden was or is this very focused on

and i need to get back in pakistan and talk with them more about it. there is some reason for more optimism today than if i was testifying last year. but i need to do more home work before i can give you a complete answer. pakistan as you know, it's called the federal administered tribal area for a reason up in the north there. it's a very unique status that it's had since pakistan became a country. their level of sovereignty over everything that goes on there has also been at times nebulous. i hope to get a report in a month or two or three at most where i really think we're at. are we seeing real progress or not. >> i appreciate your care and caution in commenting on the work that the afghans and most particularly the pakistani forces are doing in this area. my view is that they have not yet made a significant effort to stop the flow of imodium calcium nitrate and other bomb components based on everything i have seen and heard. i would appreciate any additional update you can give me at an appropriate time. and in the time i have left, to turn to a s

pakistan has powerful incentives to do so. in 2011 alone 2000 attacks in pakistan resulted in about 2400 deaths, mostly from improvised explosive devices. mr. chairman and members of the committee, thank you for the opportunity to testify here today. we embarked on this fight a decade ago to ensure that the terrorist networks that struck in new york, in washington, d.c., and in the skies over pennsylvania would never again be able to use afghanistan as their sanctuary. thanks to the great courage and skill of the u.s. armed forces and civilian personnel to our coalition partners, and to our afghan partners, our strategy is working. while success and warfare is never guaranteed we are on a path to meet our objectives to deny safe halve tonight al qaeda and deny the taliban to overthree the afghan government. i'd like to thank the committee for your continued support of our effort in afghanistan and your strong support of the great men and women of the u.s. armed forces. mr. chairman, thank you. and i look forward to the committ

pakistan is a problem here. moving those products at an aggressive rate because of their problems with india. if we ever want to make that region more secure, we have to figure these out -- pakistan seems to be a critical piece from the national security perspective of afghanistan. but also from the economic opportunities that are being denied to them. do either one you want of you want to comment on that? >> senator, i agree with what you said and the importance of developing both internal and external markets for afghanistan, as they begin to grow more capacity. i want to thank you and the committee for support of the defense department contribution and the task force on business of the -- stability operations. part of what it does is look for a long-term significant move on the afghan economy for minimal extraction, for example. a key part of it is also to look at this bottom up -- grassroots industry, helped develop that in industries where we are helping them develop that capacity. i noted we were in afghan

i spoke to the author of the new book, "pakistan on the brink, the future of america, pakistan, afghanistan." it looks as though relationships are at their lowest point. is it really that bad? >> it has been certainly very bad and these incidents recently have -- by american soldiers, the burning of the korans, have not helped. at the end of the day, relations do manage to get back on track, i think before the chicago sun at which will take place in may, there will be the signing of the compact between afghanistan and the u.s. and there will be the signing of the strategic pact with nato as well. i think the broad parameters between the government and the americans will eventually emerge. >> is there any prospect of an afghan peace settlement? >> the taliban has suspended the talks were having with the americans. i have the suspension will be short-term. one complaint is the talks have been going too slowly. they're the ones who want these talks to go faster. we have been bogged down for three or four months in the present exchange deal that the americans and the taliban have been negotiati